Death Penalty for Rebellious Children

Charlie Fuqua, the Republican candidate for the Arkansas House of Representatives who called for expelling Muslims from the United States in his book, also wrote in support for instituting the death penalty for "rebellious children."

In "God's Law," Fuqua's 2012 book, the candidate wrote that while parents love their children, a process could be set up to allow for the institution of the death penalty for "rebellious children," according to the Arkansas Times. Fuqua, who is anti-abortion, points out that the course of action involved in sentencing a child to death is described in the Bible and would involve judicial approval. While it is unlikely that many parents would seek to have their children killed by the government, Fuqua wrote, such power would serve as a way to stop rebellious children.

The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:

This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children. I cannot think of one instance in the Scripture where parents had their child put to death. Why is this so? Other than the love Christ has for us, there is no greater love then [sic] that of a parent for their child. The last people who would want to see a child put to death would be the parents of the child. Even so, the Scrpture [sic] provides a safe guard to protect children from parents who would wrongly exercise the death penalty against them. Parents are required to bring their children to the gate of the city. The gate of the city was the place where the elders of the city met and made judicial pronouncements. In other words, the parents were required to take their children to a court of law and lay out their case before the proper judicial authority, and let the judicial authority determine if the child should be put to death. I know of many cases of rebellious children, however, I cannot think of one case where I believe that a parent had given up on their child to the point that they would have taken their child to a court of law and asked the court to rule that the child be put to death. Even though this procedure would rarely be used, if it were the law of land, it would give parents authority. Children would know that their parents had authority and it would be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents.

In the same book, Fuqua advocated for expelling Muslims from the U.S., saying it would solve what he described as the "Muslim problem." Fuqua, who has been backed by the state GOP and is seeking a comeback, has found himself under attack by Republicans since his comments surfaced at the same time it was reported that state Rep. Jon Hubbard (R-Jonesboro) endorsed slavery in his book. Fuqua told the Associated Press that he was surprised by the reaction to his writings on Muslims.

"There is a strange alliance between the liberal left and the Muslim religion. It may be that since both are the enemies of Christianity, that they both believe that, my enemy's enemy is my friend," Fuqua writes. "However there are several similarities between the two. Both are antichrist in that they both deny that Jesus is God in the flesh of man, and the savior of mankind. They both also hold that their cause should take over the entire world through violent, bloody, revolution."

My serious question is, if you believe that the laws should reflect biblical concepts, like "Gay people shouldn't be allowed to legally marry" then where do you draw the line, and say "Okay, that may be in the bible, but we aren't going to write that into the laws." Or do you? Obviously this guy doens't think you do draw the line, or anyway, you don't draw the line before "Giving disrespectful children the chair."

I think the media worked really hard to come up with some lunatic Christian who holds these views, when this is a view that is normally held by Muslims. There is a heartbreaking story that happened here in the Dallas area just a couple years ago that a father killed his two teenagle daughters, and he has never been caught. I can't help but believe that he is being hidden by an Islamic community that agrees with what he did.

I think the media worked really hard to come up with some lunatic Christian who holds these views, when this is a view that is normally held by Muslims. There is a heartbreaking story that happened here in the Dallas area just a couple years ago that a father killed his two teenagle daughters, and he has never been caught. I can't help but believe that he is being hidden by an Islamic community that agrees with what he did.

Seriously????? It's the media's fault for reporting that a candidate currently running for HofR wrote a book supporting the death penalty for rebellious kids? I would think that would be something that the people of AR would want to know before they vote.

I really would like some insight on my question though. If you believe that our laws should be biblical, how do you decide which ones to enact (like no gay marriage) and which ones to ignore (like the death penalty for rebellious kids.)

My serious question is, if you believe that the laws should reflect biblical concepts, like "Gay people shouldn't be allowed to legally marry" then where do you draw the line, and say "Okay, that may be in the bible, but we aren't going to write that into the laws." Or do you? Obviously this guy doens't think you do draw the line, or anyway, you don't draw the line before "Giving disrespectful children the chair."

That law in the Bible is no longer in effect, just like the laws about sacrificing animals. If he is going to abide by that law than he should be sacrificing animals too.

I really would like some insight on my question though. If you believe that our laws should be biblical, how do you decide which ones to enact (like no gay marriage) and which ones to ignore (like the death penalty for rebellious kids.)

That was Jewish law as was the whole old Testament. Jesus fulfilled that law and it is no longer in effect. Jesus himself said that marriage is between a male and female.

I doubt that you will find a sane person that thinks you should execute children. (Abortion debate aside)

In regards to your question. I can not speak for all religions, but what I am familiar with is that when Christ came, the old law (Old Testament) was made void, and the New Testament was written. Homosexuality is spoken about in both the Old and the New Testament. There are some religions that follow the old testament. I am a Baptist, and we follow the New Testament.